Fujifilm X100S Review

When Fujifilm announced its FinePix X100 retro-styled compact at Photokina 2010, it instantly captured the imagination of serious photographers. With its fixed 23mm F2 lens and SLR-sized APS-C sensor, it offered outstanding image quality, while its 'traditional' dial-based handling and innovative optical/electronic 'hybrid' viewfinder gave a shooting experience reminiscent of rangefinder cameras. On launch its firmware was riddled with frustrating bugs and quirks, but a series of updates transformed it into a serious photographic tool. Certain flaws remained, apparently too deeply embedded into the hardware to be fixable, but despite this, it counts as something of a cult classic.

The X100S sees Fujifilm revisiting the concept, but while the external design is essentially unchanged, it's a very different camera inside. It uses a 16.3MP X-Trans CMOS sensor similar to that seen in the interchangeable lens X-Pro1 and X-E1 models, but now with on-chip phase detection promising much-improved autofocus speed. This is supported by a new processor, the 'EXR Processor II', which includes a new 'Lens Modulation Optimizer' function. According to Fujifilm this 'overcomes' lens aberrations such as diffraction and peripheral aberrations, and should give improved image quality at the largest and smallest apertures. The electronic viewfinder has been upgraded to a higher-resolution 2.35M dot display (from 1.44M dot); however this isn't the OLED unit used in the X-E1, but an LCD instead.

Two additional manual focus aids are available when using the EVF or LCD - a focus 'peaking' display that outlines in-focus elements, and an all-new 'Digital Split Image focusing' display that uses phase detection data from the sensor, and is designed to offer a similar experience to manual focus film cameras. In addition, the movement sensor on the manual focus ring has been upgraded to detect movement with greater precision - which Fujifilm says will make it more responsive.

The user interface gains all the improvements Fujifilm has made in its X-series cameras over the past few years, including an onscreen 'Q' menu to access major settings, and a much-improved tabbed menu system.

Aside from these headline features, Fujifilm is promising a whole host of smaller tweaks and improvements covering every aspect of the camera's design and operation - no fewer than 70 in total. Many of these address bugs and quirks highlighted by users and reviewers, demonstrating once again Fujifilm's laudable desire to listen to feedback and learn from it. Some controls have been subtly tweaked, movie mode is much improved, and small but important operability issues have been addressed.

Side-by-side with the Fujifilm X20

Here's the X100S side-by-side with the X20 that Fujifilm announced at the same time (we reviewed it earlier this year). The two cameras are very different beasts, of course, but share a lot of common features, and the family resemblance is obvious.

Here's the X100S alongside the co-announced X20 zoom compact. Both cameras feature X-Trans CMOS sensors with on-chip phase detection AF, optical viewfinders with detailed information overlays, and lots of external controls. Their on-screen user interfaces and menu systems are very similar too. The big difference is that the X20's fast (F2-2.8) 28-112mm equivalent zoom is coupled to a much smaller, 2/3"-type sensor.

Compared to Sony Cyber-shot RX1R

The X100S's most natural peer (forgetting the massive price difference) is Sony's RX1R, which offers a full-frame 24MP CMOS sensor and a similar 35mm (equivalent) F2 lens as the X100S.

The X100S is slightly taller and wider, but on the plus side, it has a better-defined grip, and of course that unique Fujifilm built-in hybrid viewfinder. Given that the RX1R is packing a full-frame sensor inside it though, the Cyber-shot is impressively compact.

From behind, its the X100S's viewfinder that represents the main difference between the two cameras. The rear control cluster on both models is pretty standard, but the RX1R does have a larger display (which partly makes up for the lack of a finder).

From the top, it is very obvious just how big the RX1R's lens is compared to the almost pancake design of the Fujifilm's 23mm F2. Both cameras have manual aperture rings, and external exposure compensation dials, but the X100S also offers a manual shutter speed dial. The RX1R features an exposure mode dial, in the same position.

Comments

Ι find it extremely difficult to see the use of these cams anyway...All these about street photography which needs some peculiar cams is IMO rather a philology.Street photography as a term/art does not need a certain cam with certain abilities or whatsoever, just something handy and reliable, top IQ is not its main quest.The only positive thing in these cams is that they explore miniaturization.

Ya... completely agree with you.. I find the mobile camera best for capturing street (if considering the size) but if things like AF speed, image quality and controls come - the mobile cannot do well and heres where this kinda device is more handy than a Bulky gadget which makes your subject more aware and you have to carry weight all the time. taking out and making a DSLR ready also takes time and grabs others attention, so for that this kind of device or even a mobile is better for capturing street and candid

Cameras actually DO need certain features for optimal street. Prefocus abilities, auto low limits for shutter speeds, bigger than the frame viewfinders, etc. Many street photographers find one or more of these mandatory for their process. You will be surprised how many otherwise excellent and ergonomic cameras can't be prefocused which makes them useless for hip or waist level shooting.

Dotes, which one don't have have manual shooting mode or manual focus out of the ones with a good sensor size and image quality? That is the ability to set low limits of shutter and pre-focus. How would you need it as a unique and highlighted function separate from these common modes?

Take the Sony NEX series as an example. There are NO distance scales on the E-mount lenses, not even on the Zeiss e-mount lenses. And there is NO electronic distance scale in software (Fuji's do have one). This means you can't set focus to a predetermined distance, a feature which is needed for shooting without looking at the screen or through the viewfinder, i. e. for waist or hip shooting. Manual focus is not the same as distance pre-focus. Manual focus can't help you if you are not looking thorugh the viewfinder/screen.

The only way to use a NEX camera as a zone focus camera is to use adapted lenses with distance scales on them.

How is manually setting focus for a distance not the same as pre-focusing for a certain distance? Does not make sense. No matter what terms you use - set the camera for a distance using auto focus or manual focus, keep on manual focus, shoot when subject is that distance. You don't need distance scale on camera or the lens to do it.

It takes a lot more accuracy to do it with sports back in the days of no AF using telephoto lenses and large aperture than it does street shooting from the hip - nobody would use a distance scale for this but manually focus it first. Scales are never perfectly accurate and there were no laser range finders.

Sum it up - any camera with manual focus can be pre-focused or zone focused within 5 seconds time.

I don't think you truly understand the problem. You don't have 5 seconds to pre-focus when out on the streets. Distance calibation should be possible to accomplish in a moment, whenever I want, preferably without the need to raise the camera to my face.

Besides, there is not always an object available around you at the required distance so that you use it to AF/manual prefocus. So, on top of raising the camera to eye level, you need to move around to get something in this distance. No, thanks. I'll just stick to manual focus lenses with scales.

It's a great camera for the street but don't undermine it's ability for anything else that you might like to do. It has a stellar image quality and amazing color matrix only Fuji knows how to produce. Anything you picture with this just looks stunning if you know what you are doing. NEX series doesn't even come close to the quality. I have owned NEX and it pretty much sucked. This is the 1st time the image quality of an APS-C sensor looked better than Full-Frame. I rest my case.

Their are more "CONS" listed here than their are in Pelican Bay Prison. And it still gets an 81% + Gold Award. So it has been decided by those in charge, make a "Retro" looking camera and name it Fujifilm and bingo it's a world class winner. I wish I had my Brownie that I got from Kellogg's Corn Flakes box tops. It surely would garner a 83% and don't call me Shirley:-))

I've had a sony nex, nikon d600 and a canon 60d and I use this camera 5x more than I have any others. To me it's a Gold no doubt. I think there might be a lot of things people think can be better, but the good far outweighs them.

@chaking. To each his own. I have my arsenal and I'm fond of my Nex 6. Maybe its a bias against Sony, who knows. To me at least I enjoy the noise free stunning photos I get. The AF is accurate and fast. Yes Sony really needs to put more lenses out. I learned the camera with the kit lens (16-50) and now Im using the 35 Prime and the 10-18 much better than the 24 Zeiss. Last if it goes on sale I may go long with the 55-200. Thats it.

Sorry, that's not how it works. It's very easy to be neat-picky and list things you wish were there or different but what's important is how bad is it. Are the cons earth shattering in the grand scheme of things or they are just good to haves. If it's the latter then the came by virtue of all it's amazing pros deserves to be Gold Awarded.

So glad a major reviewer finally discussed the lack of face detection in Fuji's "advanced" cameras. I hope Fuji will implement face detection via firmware upgrade in its "advanced" cameras, and/or in its upcoming cameras.

What's wrong with having it? Can be quite useful, even some pros like it on olympus e-m5. And how you can even link face detection and 'idiot mode'. Or are you still using only manual focus and consider everyone who is using AF 'noobs'?

As a user of the X100 and XP1 I would love face detect. I went to a music festival recently and every pic of me is OOF because I handed the cam to a non-photographer. Face detect would have negated this issue.

I'm always amused at haters that resort to insults and put downs. If someone doesn't like to use face detection, keep the feature turned "off." It's hilarious to see some feel threatened by face detection. I suppose if future Fuji cameras add face detection, people like "samhain" will automatically consider to those cameras as not "real" cameras.

Another good to have feature but not really important. The target market for X100S according to Fujifilm are advanced users and professional photographers. Anybody uses it will just have to know how to shoot right.

I've noticed that using face detection mode on my EM5 (even with the eye feature on) that the camera viewfinder draws a green box around the face and focuses in the middle. Of course, smack dab in the middle of most faces is a nose sticking out, which is what the camera focuses on. When shooting wide open, the nose is in focus and the eyes are not.

With all the negative points in the conclusion, I find difficult to believe that X100s scored higher than Ricoh GR :o Although, I will admit that the X100s looks prettier in the classic rangefinder appearance :)

I just reviewed the sample images that Barney took with the original x100. Night and day difference. The x100 images are very good and with good color and detail. X100s is clearly not an award winning camera so why is the dpreview gold being awarded to a jpg snapshot camera that is grossly overpriced?

David, you've made that point several times in the comments already, and you've also sent me three personal emails about the same matter. I respect your opinion, but at this point you're just trolling, whether you realise it or not.

All this negativity coming from someone who's back up camera is an EOS-M. The camera that's one of the biggest dogs of an ILC to come down the pike in years? The camera that Canon lowered the price to $299.00 with a lens? The camera that they're giving you the body for free when you buy the lens just to get it out of their inventory because it's so bad? That's what you use as your basis to slam the images and quality of the X100S? Really?

I agree with David which I believe has something to do with the blown out highlights or default exposure of the S. I believe the x100s has to be underexposed or used with the DR expansion to maintain those highlights. It's as though Fujifilm moved the DR of this camera to the shadow regions.

I realize that the default tone curve is a bit different on my X-Pro1, but I only seem to encounter "bad" blown highlights shooting at the expanded ISO 100. This is effectively "DR50" as it loses a stop of highlight detail vs the native base ISO of 200.

That said, I have no problem shooting at DR200 or DR400 since there really isn't any shadow noise to speak of at ISO 800, as the review mentions.

I owned the X100, gave it to my daughter when I received the X100S. My main rant with the X100 is that it was slow to focus. I also have an Olympus OM-D and a 5D3. The slowest is the X100S, HOWEVER, the image quality is so good, even at high ISOs (I can use it at night, outdoors, with light from poles, stores and such), that it keeps amazing me. And, I own a Retina Mac, so I can see the quality. The Olympus is also incredible for its size, but is different and hard to describe. It's quite sharp, but the Fuji has a strange combination of sharpness and "creaminess". Now I don't go out with just one camera: it's either the Olympus or the Canon AND always the Fuji. BTW, the ND filter in itself is the great bonus. I live in the Caribbean, without that filter, things would have been different.

yes, it seems most people don't appreciate the subtlety of the quality of rendering from x-trans cameras. dpreview test images from other cameras may show more 'detail' than the x-100s but there is more to an image than seeing details in sharp relief.

with that said, it seems most people on flickr shoot the x100s jpgs with default NR and shadow settings and as a result there are a lot of kind of the water color smeared detail images that x-trans is apt to produce

Unbelievable. This is the first time I have seen such a terrible review. All of the samples are random snaps most likely in auto or program mode and the results are not matching the conclusion. Another point is that the conclusion pros / cons are of little actual value to the reader. Jpegs are excellent? really. A $1,300 camera that is given a Gold Award no less says excellent jpgs. WOW. and that isn't even correct. I looked closely at every single sample image and they are terrible. Same old issue especially the mushiness. I am beside myself with disbelief that the reviewer has any real experience and knowledge in this field. I am sorry to say this because it's not "nice" but this has to be said.

Are you just upset that the X100S is as good as it is and you are using an EOS-M or are you upset that you paid full price for your EOS-M before the bottom fell out on the price of a true "dog" of a camera. Sounds like equipment envy.

Anyone who has actually used an X100S at this point will know which portions of the review are acceptable as fact, which are nit picking issues and which (like using inferior RAW processors for your sample images) have no merit at all.

Scott you don't find it hilarious that you need to buy third party software to get what X-Trans fans are saying is proper results? It is already a very expensive camera that does not match the $299 EOS-M in still image or video quality. What is the main purpose of a camera?

All the buttons, dials, hybrid viewfinder, cool styling in the world does not mean anything if their use doesn't provide superior result.

Many people shoot RAW + JPEG and discard RAW file if the exposure is good - Fujifilm has a history of great JPEG on and off but it needs to be on for a $1,000+ camera and it is not. X100S JPEG has almost lost some detail at ISO 800 that the cheap, fail EOS-M has at ISO 3200!

X100S and X-E1 should have better detail than they do with JPEG, bundled software, and Adobe. Still, I am hoping to see a posted source of images converted from the recommended third party software listed all over the comments here - or it is only smoke and mirrors.

Im sorry but … Why are you: “hoping to see a posted source of images converted from the recommended third party software listed all over the comments here” when you clearly hate this camera as much as you do ? Its just hard to understand why someone would obsess over an item they consider beneath their skill level ?I did have to buy Apple’s Aperture since i like the way it handles my files a little more than Lightroom but quite frankly i was more than happy to do so as i just consider it an investment but for some estrange reason that seems to bother you more than me… And mind you not a penny ever came out of your pocket … I just don’t get it

Well i think you have said it plenty of time oh almighty one ! Thanks for sharing some of your infinite wisdom upon us puny mortals and PLEASE feel free to move on with your life and grace other forums with your presence and wisdom while millions of us enjoy our false fantasies here… LOL

Who's buying third party software for what? Really, for Xtrans results? How about everyone else that shoots RAW on any camera that has a Bayer or Foveon sensor too? Or did Canon/Nikon and all the other manufacturers purchase Adobe, Apple and all the other manufacturers of RAW processing software so they are no longer third party?

Other than Iredient for Mac (which from what I've read trumps just about everything else available for processing X trans files) I've had good results with Silkypix that comes with the camera from Fuji. Never really used the others so I'm not all that concerned with how much better workflow is with the other options. Silypix works fine for me.

Maybe if more people would actually use Silkypix for it's intended purpose rather than complaining about how the workflow isn't as smooth as what they do importing into one program, then working the image in another then complain that the images look muddy or plastic there wouldn't be all this issue.

Fuji has a great RAW processor for Xtans packaged with the camera. They gave all the needed algorithems to the other software manufacturers. You or anyone else choosing to use a subpar RAW processing program put out by another software company is Fuji's fault in what way?

People should try what is known to work correctly or quit complaining.

As far as video is concerned, Fuji ain't Canikon. They have obviously intended their cameras to be for still images with the option to shoot video. They aren't selling a $1300 camcorder. If I want to shoot video for personal use I'll buy an HD camcorder.

Leica just added video to the new "M" for the first time. How many Leica shooters do you think give two hoots about having video in that camera or said "Oh, I just bought a Leica M9 and I'm so upset because I can't shoot video".

Go play with your EOS-M or NEX for video and let the grown ups enjoy a "real" camera.

And very funny the photographic apology of Barnaby Britton, but the apology some guys are expecting should be about the no-REVIEWS of Canon EOS-1D X (waiting since 2011) and Nikon D4 (waiting since 2012). If someday those stuff appears, then Barnaby smile will shine twice...

While I can completely understand why dpreview uses a "standardized" process for reviewing products...an industry standard no less in the case of ACR...unfortunately for some products, this truly kills their performance capabilities. The Fuji X Trans cams are such a product.

ACR / LR is quite poor for RAW conversion with the Fuji cams. If you value the DAM capabilities of LR over image quality and want a one app workflow solution, fine, but you are sacrificing a LOT in IQ.

If dpreview gave a score of 81 via ACR, then they will fall in love with the images via Iridient Developer.

Again, I understand dpreview can't spend hours testing numerous raw converters for the best results and it would arguably skew comparisons between products, but in the case of the X trans cams....justice is not being served.

Oh Bamboojled. Not sure what your agenda is here, seems to be mindlessly raging against the Fuji cams. Whatever turns you on dude.

My agenda is this: If using a particular software *dramatically* worsens the final images from *any* camera, I would want to know about it. And the reverse is also true, if using a $75 piece of software (Iridient Developer) would *dramatically* improve the final images from *any* camera, I would want to know.

For comparisons, we can't cripple a product's potential by refusing to use a different RAW converter. If after trying ID with Fuji raws, you still prefer the Ricoh...great. Just don't base your rage and reviewer conspiracies on using ACR for the Fuji images, cuz it sucks.

If a review supplies images that are completely opposite to what the reviewer is claiming, I'M GOING TO CALL IT AS I SEE IT!

If you feel that the reviewer should have used different software in his review then that is your issue, I AM COMMENTING ON THE REVIEW, THE IMAGES SUPPLIED AND WHAT THE REVIEWER STATES!

The fact that the reviewer didn't say, (The images I have included suck by comparison to the competition, but if you go out and get different software it is much better) speaks volumes to my point and case...I can only comment on what is said and supplied by the reviewer.

There is no conspiracy, nor have I said there was.What I did do is point out the inconsistencies in the Review.

Namely, crappy smudging of detail at all ISO's in the RAW samples by comparison to the competition.

Lower Dynamic range against the competition, which was said to be no big deal

Lens sharpness and corner resolution not tested with new test chart, even though this test was used on the Ricoh and Nikon test, despite the fact that the Fuji was almost a month later and that the reviewer said that he was shooting this camera for almost 2 weeks exclusively.

I know that certain spec heads will never be able to get this concept, but an excellent product is often the average of all its pros and cons. Some of you guys that want to take the X100s on a toe-to-toe witch hunt against every other camera out there based on this spec or that sample image on some review website can and will never be able to appreciate the end result of actually shooting with a camera like this because you are trapped by analysis paralysis. You are the seekers of the Holy Grail who never leave the castle because you don't yet have the finest sword ever made by man and you fail to realize you never will.

Here is all you and anyone else need to know, ever: the competition makes a swell product too. Go there, then, and frolic in the knowledge that your this or that brand has better DR than this or that other thing, or is sharper, or lighter, or cheaper. The X100 is something you actually have to use to fully appreciate, and it has all the character one ever needs.

In the studio comparison the x100 raw files look better that the x100s raws. But in jpeg the x100s looks much better. Either the raw processing software was sub-optimal with the x100s or the in-camera processing of the x100s is very good.

Again - this is due testing procedures of dpreview and the default unsharpened output of Adobe products.In real life you can use other RAW converters like Aperture, C1, dcraw or just sharpen the output and it looks much better.

Just download the trial of C1, the RAF files from dpreview and see for yourself.

The color smearing, etc is due to ACR. Try Iridient Developer (ID), C1P7 or Aperture and voila...goes away. I've needed ID's CA removal to a small degree on some shots..otherwise the images are very impressive.

If you and others don't want to be bothered with trying new workflows to see the full potential of the Fuji cams...ok, I understand, but that's not the camera's fault.

We've heard that all before.But the truth is that ACR does a vey good job, but not at its standard settings. And to be honest I can't see anyone using only the default RAW output of any RAW converter because it just doesn't make any sense.

Moreover C1 and Aperture are as much as industry standard as ACR, and only ACR default output looks bland.

The detailed score at the end of the review shows a strange conclusion: if you select the X100 in order to compare its score to the X100s you'll see that the X100 has a better Metering and focus accuracy score than the X100s!How is it possible?

Imho, usually Fuji color is not that vibrant just as if there’s very slight silver tint. For this, it gives better-than-real skin tone and many times, tender color overall. Still it makes better color than most of others do (greenish tint, unbalanced color etc.)

Bought one a few weeks ago after owning the original model.Where the original 100 fell down was in shooting my grand kids:the pic I was expecting... was not the one I got. I was that disappointed that I sold my X100 and just on the strength of the first reviews, quickly bought the new S model. Guess what? Same problem! There's an inherent shutter lag here: that shows markedly when taking pics of the fleeting facial expressions of children. The cam missed the shot a good 9 out of 10 times. Not like my Sony A77 or my Sony A900! For that reason alone I took the X100S back to the sellers.Perhaps the next iteration will fix this: that criticism aside I loved the camera and for everything else including my passion... landscapes, it worked superbly.For shooting active kids...NO! For everything else... incomparable! Like I said; I am eagerly awaiting the third iteration of the X100!

Or your settings were wrong, using too slow a shutter speed or aperture, etc. What's interesting is that hundreds -- perhaps thousands -- of street shooters and experienced photographers ae able to capture moving subjects indoors and out without this issue.

Neverthelss, after an infinite number of online reviews that have been done on the x-series cameras it is really common knowledge that these aren't (and never were) intended as replacements for DSLR cameras like your two Sonys when it comes to "action" and sports photography. Still, children aren't always running and photographers who have good anticipation skills can take sharp photos with the x100s -- witness Ken Rockwell's review of the camera and how he shoots his own kids with it.

Why someone thinks they need to ditch perfectly fine camera gear just because it doesn't "do it all" is beyond me. I have a Nikon DSLR, Fuji XE-1, and a Sony RX100. When I am not shooting fast action or extremes I prefer the Fuji or Sony. Easy.

Interesting. I find that using the OVF, I many times think I just missed the expression when pressing the shutter, the image taken has just captured (can be seen already in the brief preview that flashes by in the viewfinder as the shot is taken) is that fleeing expression, just as if the camera took the shot before I pressed the shutter almost. I guess that is one clear advantage with an OVF compared to EVF. Maybe you were using the EVF or LCD? Try the OVF optical view instead? I find it works really well actually photographing my daughter, and trust me, she can sometimes have many different expressions in just a couple of seconds...lol

I suppose I paid $1000 for the aperture ring, shutter speed dial, and the wonderful OVF. When you put it that way it sounds ridiculous, but yet I still have no regrets. If you got your start with a Pentax K1000 or if you've spent time with a Leica, the manual controls are invaluable.

So you're saying the $1000 Fujifilm produces better IQ compared to a $299 Canon, Hmm... I have played with EOS-M with 22mm lens. it's a fine camera. I don't own both cameras but I also played with the 100s. it's alright but not worth the price. People say it's pricy because it's made in japan and so does EOS-M. EOS-M lacks direct interface, viewfinder but solid built and has touch screen plus touch focus. But at $300, it's a bargain.

I love the camera and everything about it. just took some shots wit the x100 so far. good stuff - but i have the feeling that the lens is good but not outstanding like the rest. If the the next generation get THE LENS (F1.4) i will forget that i already have a very good camera : )

Thanks for the review. It mirrors my personal experience entirely. I have to say though that if I liked EVSs (which I don't) I would probably have gone with the Olympus OM-D as my every-day camera to compliment my Nikon stable.

The OOC JPEGs never fail to impress. Some of my all-time favorite images were taken with the X100S that you'll find in my user review. But you have to be patient, it's not a run-and-gun camera, IMO, compared to a DSLR.

EDIT: I usually shoot RAW+JPEG, and usually throw away the RAW except in tricky exposure situations.

What's all the whining and fussing about? Complaints about single focal length lens....X-Trans no good, bla, bla, bla. Well, fortunately there are many choices these days for cameras, so you can buy what makes you happy ;-). Me personally, I'm in love with my X100S AND its X-Trans sensor (shooting RAW and processing in LR too - OMG!, say it ain't so). But I also keep a Nikon D600 with a few lenses for any time when a 35mm focal length won't do.

I always shoot RAW. I actually spent several days perfecting SilkyPix to get results out of RAW that were same as jpg. I developed a process to export TIFF from SP that demosaiced the RAF perfectly then used lightroom for editing. I respectfully disagree with anyone who says its simply an algorithm. the simple fact is pseudo random and excessive green pixels require more interpolation in the demosaic process and the results will always be mushy. Color will also never be as true compared to Bayer. Bayer requires less and more balanced interpolation. It's just a fact. There is no way anyone that knows good image quality can say that any of these images provided in the dpreview of the x100s are good. If they do it's complete denial. And frankly I am concerned that DPReview would rate this camera so high while leaving requiring more "read between the lines" in the conclusion. I have been a dpreview fan since the first days with Phil Askey and could trust the conclusions with my wallet.

I had the X-E1 for a short while. Moved to EOS M. The X-Trans is the issue for this camera. All shots included above, especially the young lady outside look sick. Flat, unsharp, and no detail. I use 5DMIIs for paid work, but for family and vacation shots I would be very upset to come back from long vacation to see all my photos looking anything like those in the examples. Fuji should ditch the X-Trans and refund people their money or send replacement camera with Bayer sensor. The X100 with Bayer sensor was the best. They should have stuck with that. Anyone else, in my opinion, that believes that the images in the test look good for $1k camera is in denial.

I really wanted to buy X100s but am holding back. I hear Fuji is going release a new model in X-line( maybe Fuji X-A1) with a Bayer sensor ... I strongly believe that X200 will be without this X-Trans Sensor ...

David, if you're correct, then I must be utterly blind. Not to mention other numerous pro photogs raving about the Fuji cams on the inter webs :)

Also, if someone is using ACR/LR for raw conversion or even SilkyPix, you are completely missing the boat. Iridient Developer (!) or Capture One Pro 7 are far, far superior. If someone had shown me images from the Fuji cams via ACR, there's no way in hell I would have bought a Fuji kit.

Thanks for the review I enjoyed reading it and agree with most of your comments.A small point about the command control dial. It also serves as full zoom button in playback mode and toggle between Focus Peaking and Digital Split Image in manual focus mode. I agree though it would be nice if you could assign custom functions, I currently use the function button to toggle between still/movie and I know a lot of people use the function button for ND filter, it would be nice to have both options, function ND filter, command control stills/movie.

EOS M with 22mm lens, 11-22mm IS lens, EOS adapter, and one of several 50 to 100mm Canon EF primes under $500 = all together same or less price as Fuji X100S by itself.

Think of like this. If offered two 60" television sets - one is $800 with better image quality and more modern , sleek look - other is $1,800 with more buttons on the remote and more bulky, retro styling - who going to pick the $1,800 set?

What else but cameras will people still jump all over the second scenario. Nevertheless, I am glad it is helping keep Fujifilm strong.

True:The issue in the US is that Canon may NOT release any future EOS-M cameras. They are not importing or supporting the wide angle zoom.With the improved AF with the new firmware, the EOS-M with the 22mm is a superb camera.My issue is that I prefer cameras with viewfinders. I wand an EOS-M variant with an integrated EVF.

I find it hard to choose between fixed 28, fixed 35 and the option of lenses. I'd keep them all if I could! Have used all three for a long time. Favourite is prob x100s overall. Ricoh snap + IQ + size and price is amazing, and wider angle. Xpro1 feels so nice to use. Lovely size and weight and some great lenses...

Why not release the review after the product being discontinued, then X100s could raise the price at 2nd market rocket high! This is not first time that Dpr release late product review for brands except C/N!

More about gear in this article

DPR reader Philip Ewing found he had little time outside of long hours at the office to spend on photography, so he turned his commute into a time to exercise some creativity. Each day he brings his camera along with him on Washington D.C.'s Metrorail system, where he photographs the Brutalist-style architecture, morning rushes and evening light of the Metro subway. Read more

Gene Smirnov is a regular DPR reader and a working photographer based in Philadelphia. As a music photographer he's photographed over 300 bands, and now mainly shoots portraits for magazines. He's got years of professional experience under his belt, but it all began with a Nikon FM10 and a portrait gig for his college newspaper. See his work and learn more about him. Read more

When he learned that he had a hearing condition that would make continuing his work in music production difficult, Greg Krycinski picked up photography. His stark black-white-landscapes and street scenes resonate in their simplicity. See a sample of his work here and find out more about him in our Q&A. Read more

The Fujifilm TCL-X100 is a screw-in teleconverter for the X100 and X100S which increases the effective focal length of their 23mm F2 lens to 50mm. We've been shooting with the TCL-X100 for a few days now, in a range of different situations and light levels to see how it performs in everyday use. Click through to read our first impressions, and see our sample images.

Update: Fujifilm UK has officially announced a service allowing certain X-series cameras to be customized with a range of different colors and body textures. The company showed customized cameras at The Photography Show earlier this week in Birmingham, UK, and partially functional pages for an 'X Signature' went up on its website, but the service is now live. Click through for more information.

Latest in-depth reviews

The Canon G5 X Mark II earns a Silver Award with its very good image quality, flexibility and the overall engaging experience of using the camera. However, if you need the very best in autofocus and video, other options may suit you better. Find out all the details in our full G5 X II review.

360 photos and video can be very useful for certain applications (as well as having fun). The Vuze+ is an affordable 360 camera that supports both 2D and 3D (stereo vision) capture, and might be the best option for someone wanting to experiment with the 360 format.

The Mikme Pocket is a portable wireless mic with particular appeal to smartphone users looking to up their game and improve the quality of recorded audio without the cost or complexity or traditional equipment.

The 90D is essentially the DSLR version of the EOS M6 Mark II mirrorless camera that was introduced alongside it. Like the M6 II, it features a 32MP sensor, Dual Pixel AF, fast burst shooting and 4K/30p video capture. It will be available mid-September.

Latest buying guides

If you want a compact camera that produces great quality photos without the hassle of changing lenses, there are plenty of choices available for every budget. Read on to find out which portable enthusiast compacts are our favorites.

Whether you're hitting the beach in the Northern Hemisphere or the ski slopes in the Southern, a rugged compact camera makes a great companion. In this buying guide we've taken a look at nine current models and chosen our favorites.

What's the best camera for under $500? These entry level cameras should be easy to use, offer good image quality and easily connect with a smartphone for sharing. In this buying guide we've rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing less than $500 and recommended the best.

If you're looking for a high-quality camera, you don't need to spend a ton of cash, nor do you need to buy the latest and greatest new product on the market. In our latest buying guide we've selected some cameras that while they're a bit older, still offer a lot of bang for the buck.

Whether you're new to the Micro Four Thirds system or a seasoned veteran, there are plenty of lenses available for you. We've used pretty much all of them, and in this guide we're giving your our recommendations for the best MFT lenses for various situations.

Blackmagic has announced an update to Blackmagic RAW that adds support, via plugins, to Adobe Premiere Pro and Avid Media Composer. Blackmagic also announced a pair of Video Assist 12G monitor-recorders with brighter HDR displays, USB-C recording and more.

Sony has announced the impending arrival of its next-generation video camera system, the FX9. The full-frame E-mount system is set to be released later this year with a 16-35mm E-mount lens to follow in spring 2020.

The Canon G5 X Mark II earns a Silver Award with its very good image quality, flexibility and the overall engaging experience of using the camera. However, if you need the very best in autofocus and video, other options may suit you better. Find out all the details in our full G5 X II review.

The Fujifilm X-A7 is the newest addition to the company's X-series lineup. Despite its relatively low price of $700 (with lens), Fujifilm didn't skimp on features. Click through to find out what you need to know about the X-A7.

The entry-level Fujifilm X-A7 improves upon many of its predecessor's weak points, including a zippier processor, an upgraded user experience and 4K/30p video capture. It goes on sale October 24th for $700 with a 15-45mm F3.5-5.6 kit lens.

Robert Frank's unconventional approach to photography and filmmaking defied generational constraints and inspired some of the most influential artists of the 20th century. He passed away today at age 94.

All three devices offer a standard 12MP camera plus, for the first time on an iPhone, an ultra-wide 13mm camera module. The 11 Pro and 11 Pro Max also retain the telephoto camera of previous generations.

Phase One's new XT camera system incorporates the company's IQ4 series of digital backs with up to 151MP of resolution and marries them to a line of Rodenstock lenses using the new XT camera body. The result is an impressively small package for one of the largest image sensors currently on the market - take a closer look here.

Phase One has announced its new XT camera system, which includes an IQ4 digital back, body (made up of a shutter release button and two dials) and a trio of Rodenstock lenses. The company is marketing the XT as a 'travel-friendly' product for landscape photographers.